Which branch of the U.S. military is the most powerful?

Define powerful. If were talking raw destructive potential, Army or air force. If were talking ability to destroy stuff self-sufficiently with any input from other branches, marines unequivocally.

>>30746945
what a retarded question.

>>30746988
usmc doesn't have a medical field

>>30747018
Gotta love them Navy Corpsmen.

>>30746988
I don't really know how I'd define this. Imagine each branch becomes it's own country, then each of those countries go to war. Or it could be like a game of rock paper scissors.

File: dogguy.jpg (76KB, 902x600px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 902x600px

>>30746945
The USMC relies 100% on the Navy for literally everything from supply to transportation you retard. The Army is the only one capable of being self-sufficient. The Army has it's own vehicles, fixed/rotary wing fleet, and supply chain. The marines don't even have their own fucking medics.

Air Force and Navy have enough nuclear power to turn the world in to Fallout, several times over.

File: live-fire-exercise.jpg (992KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

992KB, 1200x800px

>>30746945
If all service branches got in a war the only survivors would be the fags in submarines.... so navy?

>>30747075
Is this actually true? Because I've heard it's not actually true.

>>30747081
Thats kind of a copout. Which force will have the largest remaining presence?

The army is almost as big as the next two largest branches (AF and Navy) combined, and more than twice as large as the USMC

>>30747067
they go to navy schools too. people don't realize how much the usmc depends on the navy. it's one of the reasons why their budget is so small.

>>30747132
Army is best branch confirmed.

>>30747112
the navy like I just said.

>>30747148
I never realized that their dependence on the Navy would explain their low budget. It seems so obvious.

>>30747168
You think submarines alone are enough to win a war with a significant force remaining?

>>30747152
>Army is best branch confirmed.

Given the vague parameters of the OP, I'd say it looks that way. Given their way of conducting war and their numerical advantage, what are the other branches going to do to stop them? The air force can't stop an armored division with all its airfield security forces combined, and their air power won't be a factor very long as bases get overrun about as quickly as Abrams tanks can drive to one. Same with the navy trying to defend their bases without the marines. And the marines alone...even if they could somehow deal with the transport and supply problems, they'd be outnumbered greatly. They might have the BEST chance in that situation, but it wouldn't look good.

>>30747067

Uhhh, do you even know what a MAGTF is? USMC is Department of the Navy and green side corpsmen are essentially Marines.

Doggies need huge logistical trains to operate, MAGTF's/MUE's are self sustaining.

>>30747287
How would you restate OP's question to make it better? It seems like you know enough to phrase a more logical scenario.

>>30747194
When literally everything else is dead? yes, I do.

File: Sad crab.jpg (118KB, 511x788px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 511x788px

>>30746988
The Army even has anti-air capabilities...

Were you a Marine? That's the only way I can fathom you were brainwashed to think the Marines are any more independent than a 15-year-old girl.

>>30747437
So in your scenario, the Army, Air Force, Navy and Marines would all get mutually wiped out, leaving only the Navy's submarines left?

File: 1448044694937.jpg (15KB, 316x202px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 316x202px

>>30747319
BUT THEY ARE NOT MARINES ARE THEY? You're arguing that NAVY SAILORS are "essentially marines" does not actually make them marines.

God dammit!! Marines are so fucking retarded literally every second of every hour of every day.

>>30746945

Coast Guard.

File: Fuck isis.jpg (65KB, 539x960px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 539x960px

>>30747484
the entire world would be under the shadow of nuclear mushroom-clouds and everything would be killed by the blasts and the ensuing radiation. The last people alive would be the people sitting in the submarines at the bottom of the ocean. They too would perish but indeed be the last humans alive on earth.

Your situation would be much more interesting if you had erased nuclear weapons from the question. Even then, the Army would fucking steamroll the rest of the military so it still would be a boring conversation.

>>30747554
The few.
The proud.
The Coast Guard.

>>30747558
Ah, that's what I wanted. Thanks you. So nuclear weapons were the unbalanced factor that messed the scenario up. So Army wins is the obvious answer.

How would you improve the question?

>>30747594
Division vs division, to negate the total size of the branch as a factor?

File: image.jpg (42KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 400x300px

>>30747507

No, they aren't marines. If it made sense for the USMC to have corpsman that weren't navy then they would do it. The USMC is DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY.

So the USMC gets corpsman from the navy, the army gets Bulls to cuck them from the USMC.

>>30746988
>Marines
>Completely dependent upon the Navy for support and funding
>Doesn't even have it's own medical

lmao

Honestly OP, probably the Army. Second would be the Navy, because they own their own branch of grunts.

>>30747676
Why are the grunts in the Navy?

>>30746945
Navy.


Subs ftw

>>30747686
Navy firefighters. Fire extinguishers make a formidable weapon.

File: DON-org-sec.png (42KB, 775x562px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 775x562px

>>30747686
Nah, I mean the Dept. of the Navy owns the Marines.

>>30747661
So you admit that the sentence, "ability to destroy stuff self-sufficiently with any input from other branches" is retarded?

Even you admit that the Marines rely on the Navy FOR FUCKING EVERYTHING so your only answer left is a nice "yes"

>>30747802

BECAUSE THE MARINES ARE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY. OTHER THAN CORPSMEN THE USMC IS SELF SUFFECIENT. THE USMC HAS AN AIR WING AND THE ENTIRE TIME I WAS IN AFG WE FLEW AROUND ON USMC OSPREYS.

Seriously, look up MAGTF and educate yourself on doctrines.

According to a modern war?

Air Force. Air superiority rules full-scale combat in the modern day.

>Can't defend your airspace?
>Fuck your troops, have bombs
>Fuck your support units and convoys
>Fuck your factories too
>And your civilians
>And your government
>There is zero means of reacquiring air superiority in an area once you lose it. Can't launch fighters for a week? Say goodbye to your runways and major chokepoints across the country.

Boots are important for capturing shit, and NOT just blowing everything up, but aircraft still define the modern era.

File: earth nuclear arsenals.jpg (187KB, 960x684px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 960x684px

>>30747099
if everyone launched every nuke they had they wouldn't be able to end life as we know it on earth. it would be extremely unpleasant in the short term, but life and humanity would continue on

in American, Air Force is in control of land based ICBMS and they have nuclear missiles and bombs? for their planes
Navy has boomers and some nuclear missiles? for ships
Marines/Army/Cost Guard have jack shit nuclear wise

that said, the Army controls biological and chemical warfare

>>30748034
US Army has mobile ADA (air defense artillery) at literally every post soooooo

>>30748154
>AA
>Meaning literally anything

Ballistic AA guns are there for helicopters and turboprops. They're laughably ineffective against anything with any degree of speed (see most planes used by any country with a modest GDP) or the range modern aircraft-mounted AtG missiles boast. Only SAMs have even a remote chance of threatening jet aircraft, and that's what countermeasures and electronic warfare are for.

The only real counter to modern aircraft is other modern aircraft, bud. Guess who has 90% of those?

File: cara delevingne crazy eyes.jpg (316KB, 1600x901px) Image search: [Google]

316KB, 1600x901px

>>30748214
>AtG missile has greater range than GtA missile
>electronics they can fit on a plane are better than electronics they can put in a building

File: 1467586600204.png (168KB, 657x527px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 657x527px

>>30746945
Clearly Navy.
They easily have the most Nukes and the best ability to launch them.
There are SSBNs at this very moment lurking all around the world hiding with Nukes ready to launch.

>>30746945
Probably Navy. Our carriers are a big part of what makes us such a global power. Then we control the air and got bored of bombing you, we drop the Marines off to put a boot up your ass.

>>30748038
Wait what? What bio and chemical weapons does the Army have?

File: 1450824182297.jpg (56KB, 760x572px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 760x572px

>>30748252
>Fast approaching target that can number up to a dozen versus one stationary battery that stops after being hit once and has to be repaired
>While you can just send more planes
>Planes can't maneuver around known AA positions and just fuck anything that leaves that safe space, including AA being moved
>"The USAF OBVIOUSLY hasn't developed any counters to Surface-to-Air missiles! They would've said so if they did, and I bet they're too incompetent and stupidto pose a threat to an organized military anyway! I bet they don't even have a plan and just stagnated knowing they would be worthless! The DoD is just throwing money away on useless planes!"

Hint: The Air Force is not retarded. They've figured out how to work around modern systems to do their job.

>>30748317
Navy's the second choice. Less for the bombing, more for the ability to turn half the countries in the world into third-world shitholes without firing a shot by just blockading them.

>>30748343
"That's a nice oil industry you've got there. It'd be a shame if I silently threatened to kill anyone attempting to sell you any."

File: crazy eyes.jpg (163KB, 765x1024px) Image search: [Google]

163KB, 765x1024px

>>30748252
>crazy eyes.
bitch, you aint even seen the half of crazy....

>>30748338
>The U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases, located in Fort Detrick, Maryland, produces small quantities of biological agents, for use in biological weapons defense research.
>The United States destroyed 89.75% of the original stockpile of nearly 31,100 metric tons (30,609 long tons) of nerve and mustard agents under the terms of the treaty. Chemical weapons destruction resumed in 2015 with expected completion by 2023.

>>30748409
Oh, this is doing weird things to my tingle!

Navy subs carry ballistic missiles with multiple guided nuclear warheads.

>>30748214
I don't think the Army has any AA guns anymore. Heard of a patriot missile??

good fucking luck airfag

>>30748252
Just for the record, the US Army's AD capability pales in comparison to that of Russia and China, because they rely primarily on the AF to do ot for them. Guess whom the USAF has spent decades tailoring its SEAD and DEAD capbility towards?

>>30748414
Do you really believe they'll destroy them all, or will they keep an actual, usable weapon stockpile in the case of an all out crisis?

File: hqdefault.jpg (16KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 480x360px

>>30747469
Ummm the Marines have anti air capabilities too, so your point is....

File: 1465708324546.jpg (160KB, 780x1170px) Image search: [Google]

160KB, 780x1170px

>>30748420
are you sure....?

>>30746945
>>30748531
>>30748525
>>30748507
>>30748498
>>30748483
>>30748469
>>30748420
>>30748414
Guys its the navy.
They have SSBNs lurking all around the world carrying multiple thermonuclear warheads ready to launch in a few mins of prep time. They would be flying in the air before the army or mahrines could even hope to mobolize and same goes for AF. Then they would slink back into the ocean depths before taking any harm where no branch could touch them.

File: giddy up.jpg (18KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 400x400px

>>30748483
>He thinks the USAF just fucks around and never develops countermeasures to modern equipment
>"The most advanced air force in the world recoils in fear in the face of a thirty year old anti-air weapon!"

I assumed it was the Navy, considering they have the most firepower and Air Force can't even operate at full capacity without the Navy. I thought they also have way more R&D going on than any other Department.

This is an Entirely Air Force vs. Navy debate.

>muh Nukes
>muh Air Superiority

Yeah, the Army has sweet logistix and muhreens have sweet... Ospreys I guess? But they'd both get fucked sideways by glorious airpowah courtesy of the USAF and USN.

>but muh boots on ground
>muh numbers

Have fun rushing every AF Nuke Base and every Nuke Capable Navy Vessel before they can launch and B you TFO.

Now, in terms of USN vs USAF, I'd say that the navy gets it if only because of their floor-is-lava advantage in the Oceans where they could stay out of reach.

Should really be Army + air force vs Marines + Navy

>>30748531
>challenge accepted
Post the best you got. I think the teacher plays into every guy's elementary/highschool fantasy. That along with it looking authentic, does more to me.

>>30748650
The army has thousands of aircraft.

>>30746945
The Civil Air Patrol.

>>30748738
And they're all helicopters or A10s.

>>30747568
>>30747554
Spat my soda out when reading this fuck man

>>30748770
Fair enough. They are mostly utility aircraft.

>>30748770
Air force is A10s fyi

>>30749060
Yea, good ole Nuttn is living proof.

File: 380215.jpg (36KB, 460x613px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 460x613px

>>30747594
>Army controls nukes

Please kill yourself.
If you're including nuclear warfare, that's the only scenario where the air force comes out on top.

>>30746945

All branches can be meassured roughly by four standards.

A)sheer destructive power: the ability to strike the hardest targets, deal the most damage, in greater numbers, as quick as possible. Airforce wins this one.

B)Logistical prowess: the capabilities related to fielding the most amount of combat units in as many objectives as possible, for as long as possible, and to replenish and compensate for eventual loses, in effect, the most capable of mantaining operations throughout a conflict. This goes for the Army.

C)Resourcefulness: the direct access to specialized technology and doctrine to engage different kinds of foe, the experience, expertise and morale to continue fighting after sustaining strong loses and several impediments to it's normal, full capabilities. Army wins again.

D)Autonomy: the ability to operate without a fixed state organism or some sort of economical frame to determine it's goals and function the best, the one that is more successful at devicing it's own strategy due to the qualities of it's doctrine. The Navy can launch massive operations from it's sea positions, move freely through non-contested space and engage at leisure.

>>30748650

>>30748697
This.

Generally the vote for chairman of joint chiefs of staff has historically boiled down to army and af vs marines and navy.

I'd personally give logistics to the USAF, afterall the USAF moves all of the army's shit, all the time and can shift the most the fastest.

If we are talking a situation where it was free-for-all without any foreign interference, I'm pretty confident the winner would be AF.

Why?

Marines - although its looked at as its own branch it is literally a sub-branch of the Navy. Literally cannot operate on its own without Naval Support. Most bases. Has very few standalone (non-joint)bases. Chances are they would be absorbed into Navy and placedplaced in NAVSEA or NAVAIR positions as skillset requires. Assuming they were too stupid/prideful to assimilate they would be obliterated by the AFs/Navy's air superiority, Army numbers and greater ground and pound capabilities and pure attrition as the other branches cut them off.

>4th Place - the USMC

Army - Very little amphibious capabilties that could hold a candle to the Navy's sea dominance. Would probably get bombed out of the coast and forced to move to center land mass. Leaving the Navy in control of seas and coastline (Coast Guard won't put up much of a fight). Forces the Army to focus primarily on AF.
>but muh large armies/tanks
The Army would literally be demolished by A-10C and C-130A (gunships) aircraft in the sky
>but muh anti-air
What's chaff & flare?
Also B-52s/B-1s carpet bombing the shit out of everything.

>3rd Place - The US Army

USAF vs. USN

Essentially what it would boil down to would be attrition and troop morale. Yeah the Navy has submarines and nukes but the AF has Air, Space, and Cyberspace.
Since the AF primarily has control of Space they can shut down access to satellites (say goodbye to any SATCOMM equipment) and Cyberspace (no more internetz) the navy would literally have to rely on radar (limited range) and morse code/naval flags(or LMR which is just HOW effective deep under the sea?) to communicate.
Good luck firing a nuke off of pen and ink trajectory calculations.

>>30752562
Post continued -

Although the Navy could reach any place in N. America artillary wise they would always be blind firing. With aerial C2 capabilties (AWACS/RC-135s) they wouldn't even hit anyone worth mentioning. They'd eventually need to do maintenance/refueling (yes, even nuclear power needs this) and to acquire food/supplies' etc. They would eventually have to surface and/or dock. Leaving them vulnerable to Air Power which would literally be U2 reconnaissance (pretty much out of reach of anything) and aerial refueled UAVs loaded to bear with autopilot for those quick manual pilot turnovers.

>2nd Place - US Navy

Leaving' as the winner... the USAF. Without even addressing alert aircraft, missile silos, new EMP technology or even new gen aircraft for that matter.

>Assuming of course everything ran smoothly for everyone.

>>30749586
Doesnt the navy sub nukes give them a major advantage?

years at sea, weeks unnawater, stealth, plus surprise nukes is just going to fuck up runways, oil refineries, depots, etc?

lets not forget all the AF planes and army vehicles need fuel, and a lot of that gets boated around

>>30752591 >years at sea
What is food for 500, Alex?

>>30754499
What is fucked up formatting for I'm a retard, faggot?